That looks neat! I did start using CodeBlocks and would not switch to Vitepress for now; but having a fancy landing page would be very neat!
Prototype here: External documentation links via DocumenterInterLinks inventories - Pull Request #15 - fredrikekre/DocumenterCodeBlocks.jl - GitHub, looks like this:
I am very much looking forward to trying the Interlinks – I am a huge fan of those.
I have one question regarding the line numbers. On my PR, I noticed, e.g. at States · Manopt.jl That the first line of the docs mentioning the single type or (later on that page the) function does not have a line number. Constructors however – have line numbers. Here even an example with a few lines, but also the ones with just one line
would it be possible to have an option for a single code block (like the very first one) to deactivate line numbers. I would use that for constructors only probably. Otherwise I really like the line numbers.
(Interlinks – btw – would even link the abstract manifold, maybe even the rand – super cool!)
Version 1.4.0 is released which enables copying the permalink when you click the button in the right corner. Also contains some bugfixes to the selection of first sentence in the docstring as the tooltip.
It is just the first code block which is special cased since it is usually just a single line signature. There is no special case for what the content in the block actually is. IMO it doesn’t look strange at all to have numbers in the block you talk about.
Strange might be a subjective experience here.
I think for multiline constructors line numbers are probably fine.
The markup also changes a bit I think (between the first line and the constructor)?
For single-line constructors the 1 upfront is a bit strange.
So maybe something like “unless it is a continued counting of line numbers” (cool feature btw!) a “single line code block” could also skip its line number – might be nice?
Otherwise it is a bit similar to an enumeration with just
- one point
(and sure, also that is not objectively something wrong, just subjectively.)